Wikiversity:Request custodian action

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
Custodians' tool
Custodians' tool

New request
Please sign with -- ~~~~
Welcome

Wikiversity support staff are trusted users who have access to technical features (such as protecting and deleting pages, blocking users, and undoing these actions) that help with maintenance of Wikiversity.


Action required

Templates

Development

Reference

Events and news

Custodian requests Entries
Purge cache
Edit protected page 0
Speedy deletion 4
Expired prods 7
Unblock requests 0
Possible copyvio 0
History merge 0

Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Abd 3

Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.
See the candidacy page, mentor offered, accepted, and 'crat implemented. --Abd 00:35, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User has been nominated and mentorship offered. A 'crat is needed to activate custodianship. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 21:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not pressing any buttons without more activity here. Especially not for this particular candidate-mentor pairing, because of what happened last time (no offense to either of you). Mike or Cormac might be more amenable, but you'll probably need to email them because they're both inactive these days. --SB_Johnny talk 00:11, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given how clear the policy is -- that CR shows no sentiment for actually changing the policy -- it would be simpler to go to meta and ask for a steward to approve. "What happened last time" was a complicated can of worms, and is extremely unlikely to repeat, plus I've agreed to a Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Standard stop agreement which is a more formal version of what I'd more informally agreed to before. I'd rather not open that can, but, if needed, I will, because my actions were proper, as confirmed by later events. --Abd 15:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Policy", in this case (as in several other cases) was declared without any serious discussion. We've tried to work with it as-is over the years, but the "can-of-worms" you mention made the "policy's" weakness abundantly clear (and you bear very little fault for that). I've changed the template to reflect the policy's questionable status, since you've already (again!) hinted that you wish to "go to the stewards" rather than allow for organic process here on WV. --SB_Johnny talk 01:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
SBJ, precedent is clear that if no 'crat responds to a request, that stewards may be asked. I did it before, nobody objected. As to your edit of the page, changing a policy to a proposed policy, when the policy stood, apparently without challenged, since 12 February 2007, made my jaw drop. I'll revert that. This is not the way to challenge a standing policy! --Abd 01:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody objected to what, exactly? As noted elsewhere, the pedigree of this "policy" is questionable, since there has never been a full discussion of it. Asking the stewards to re-start a mentorship that was broken up by community action would really not be helpful, Abd. We've had quite enough of going to the stewards to get around things over the past year. --SB_Johnny talk 13:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Status of this request At this point, we have an open candidacy with an agreed mentor. Per well-established procedure, any 'crat may implement the custodianship. No 'crat is obligated to do so. 'Crats are not robots, and if any 'crat is uncomfortable, it is a safeguard in the system that the 'crat is not obligated to act. There are now three options, and neither I nor Jtneill are in a rush, so these options have not been followed, but they are listed here.
  1. Specifically request other 'crats, who may not be aware of the request, to review it for action.
  2. Request a steward implement local policy in the absence of local 'crat action. This was done before, by me, in fact, when Jtneill's 'cratship sat with no action for a long time, simply due to local 'crat inattention. This is not disruptive in any way, it is not "getting around things." SB_Johnny's comment would seem to indicate that he believes he has veto power. He does, he has a pocket veto, and that kind of veto is completely legitimate. However, his pocket veto still allows other alternative actions and alternative requests.
  3. Request another custodian mentor. In that event, Jtneill would probably push the button. Any custodian who wishes to consider this should review Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Abd 3 and choose. My binding agreement to the Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Standard stop agreement should make this completely safe, but arguments over my suitability for custodianship should not be here, they should be on the candidacy page. This option, which may be followed up with some specific requests, is the simplest one, and that's why this is bolded and on this page.
  4. Withdraw the candidacy. Almost every day, I see occasions for uncontroversial use of custodial tools. When these are important, I request -- and get -- action. I know how to serve the community consensus, and I know how to avoid recusal failure, and am dedicated to both, so this would be a shame. I intend to pursue the other options first, within policy and procedure and the welfare of the wiki. --Abd 15:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Potential sock user

Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.
No activity on accounts, no further custodian action needed at this time. --Abd 14:56, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to the 'Group of spammy/socky users' section above, Hilkia9o (talk • email • contribs • stats • logs • global account) is claiming to be Toddst1, and has posted their intent to disrupt Wikiversity. Abd has removed the post on the Notices for Custodians page. Gaidheal1 19:11, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I have just noticed that four users with almost identical names created accounts within four minutes of each other.

The last has posted creative, but unpleasant, content on their user page.

Gaidheal1 19:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've speedy deleted the "creative, but unpleasant" (ASCII art) content at User:HiFre4 as vandalism/nonsense. Per Jtneill below, user can recreate if they wish to use their user page productively. --Draicone (talk) 13:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was actually more concerned that they seemed to be rather obviously have been created by one person. But if you're happy just to leave it until (if ever) they start participating in sock-like behaviour, then I'm content. In future, if I see such user pages, and also ones like the page I posted about below, I'll just stick a delete template on it. --Gaidheal1 21:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiversity does not prohibit socking, per se, if it is not disruptive. However, creating many accounts for no apparent useful educational purpose doesn't leave us thrilled. On User:Hilkia9o, my "removal" action was this, reverting as vandalism, which may not be technically correct (it was a notice of intent to disrupt, coupled with a false representation of identity).
Pseudo-Toddst1 socks are disruptive block evasion and should be treated as such, with reversion, immediate blocks, and range blocking if required. See [1] for the first report and actions taken. --Abd 16:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey all. I came here to tell you that those last 3 are confirmed as the same, as well as some others. --Bsadowski1 01:36, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Draicone (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the page of Boubaker Polynomials immediately

Discussions are archived for review purposes. Please start a new discussion to discuss the topic further.
Not done, see response below --Abd 00:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the page of the so-called Boubaker Polynomials [2], they are copied from Chebyshev polynomials by an undergraduate Arab fellow in lack of notability.

You can verify there that there are only 2 meaningless sources, no coverage and no reliable sources.

Thank you for understanding --Popo Le Chien 17:42, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • ☒N Not done. Wikiversity is not an encyclopedia, and the material there may be useful for learning. Please try to improve the page, especially if you are knowledgeable. I see that you blanked a large amount of material. Please don't do that without discussion, and it might be better to move the material to a subpage. Discuss any major changes on the Talk page. First, however, I suggest becoming familiar with Wikiversity and how we work. If you want to have a page deleted, and if the reason is obvious, you can place a speedy deletion tag and if a custodian agrees with you, it can be deleted. But I don't think any custodian here would delete that page, it would be too controversial. Beyond that, you may request deletion at Wikiversity:RFD. Again, it would be a waste of time, please see Wikiversity:Deletion policy for a discussion of deletion and alternatives. Thanks. --Abd 18:08, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action&oldid=764727"